
Ryzen 9 5900X
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-2687W v4
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Ryzen 9 5900X
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +62.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
- ✅Costs $1,592 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 761.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 8.2 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 105W instead of 160W, a 55W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2687W v4, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
Xeon E5-2687W v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅66.7% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (8,255 vs 11,888).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.2 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($2,141 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
- ❌52.4% higher power demand at 160W vs 105W.
Ryzen 9 5900X
2020Xeon E5-2687W v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +62.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
- ✅Costs $1,592 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 761.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 8.2 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 105W instead of 160W, a 55W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅66.7% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2687W v4, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (8,255 vs 11,888).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.2 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($2,141 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
- ❌52.4% higher power demand at 160W vs 105W.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 9 5900X better than Xeon E5-2687W v4?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 163 FPS |
| medium | 291 FPS | 141 FPS |
| high | 243 FPS | 114 FPS |
| ultra | 193 FPS | 93 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 307 FPS | 137 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 116 FPS |
| high | 192 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 157 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 193 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 156 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 115 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 103 FPS | 35 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 772 FPS | 326 FPS |
| medium | 647 FPS | 295 FPS |
| high | 508 FPS | 255 FPS |
| ultra | 450 FPS | 210 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 619 FPS | 282 FPS |
| medium | 536 FPS | 258 FPS |
| high | 443 FPS | 224 FPS |
| ultra | 364 FPS | 183 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 365 FPS | 183 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 167 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 255 FPS | 115 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 832 FPS | 441 FPS |
| medium | 645 FPS | 441 FPS |
| high | 558 FPS | 441 FPS |
| ultra | 459 FPS | 441 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 721 FPS | 441 FPS |
| medium | 565 FPS | 441 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 441 FPS |
| ultra | 407 FPS | 441 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 511 FPS | 441 FPS |
| medium | 421 FPS | 375 FPS |
| high | 374 FPS | 341 FPS |
| ultra | 308 FPS | 284 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 974 FPS | 441 FPS |
| medium | 974 FPS | 441 FPS |
| high | 934 FPS | 441 FPS |
| ultra | 826 FPS | 441 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 959 FPS | 441 FPS |
| medium | 843 FPS | 441 FPS |
| high | 726 FPS | 441 FPS |
| ultra | 617 FPS | 441 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 694 FPS | 441 FPS |
| medium | 621 FPS | 441 FPS |
| high | 541 FPS | 415 FPS |
| ultra | 437 FPS | 348 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 9 5900X and Xeon E5-2687W v4


Ryzen 9 5900X
Ryzen 9 5900X
The Ryzen 9 5900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 November 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 38,955 points. Launch price was $549.

Xeon E5-2687W v4
Xeon E5-2687W v4
The Xeon E5-2687W v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 160 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 17,640 points. Launch price was $2,141.
Processing Power
Both the Ryzen 9 5900X and Xeon E5-2687W v4 share an identical 12-core/24-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the Ryzen 9 5900X versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon E5-2687W v4 — a 31.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Ryzen 9 5900X uses the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon E5-2687W v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 9 5900X scores 38,955 against the Xeon E5-2687W v4's 17,640 — a 75.3% lead for the Ryzen 9 5900X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,174 vs 1,063, a 68.6% lead for the Ryzen 9 5900X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,888 vs 8,255 (36.1% advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X). L3 cache: 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 5900X vs 30 MB on the Xeon E5-2687W v4.
| Feature | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 12 / 24 | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 4.8 GHz+37% | 3.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.7 GHz+23% | 3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 64 MB+113% | 30 MB |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 3 MB+500% |
| Process | 7 nm, 12 nm-50% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
| PassMark | 38,955+121% | 17,640 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 21,000 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,174+105% | 1,063 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,888+44% | 8,255 |
Memory & Platform
The Ryzen 9 5900X uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-2687W v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon E5-2687W v4 supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 169.2% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2687W v4). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2687W v4) — the Xeon E5-2687W v4 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A320,B350,X370,B450,X470,B550,X570 (Ryzen 9 5900X) and C610,X99 (Xeon E5-2687W v4).
| Feature | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM4 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0+33% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-3200 | DDR4-2400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 1536 GB+1100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 24 | 40+67% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: AMD-V (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs Yes (Xeon E5-2687W v4). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 5900X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 9 5900X rivals Core i9-12900K.
| Feature | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | Yes |
| Target Use | Workstation | — |
Value Analysis
The Ryzen 9 5900X launched at $549 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2687W v4 debuted at $2141. On MSRP ($549 vs $2141), the Ryzen 9 5900X is $1592 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 9 5900X delivers 71.0 pts/$ vs 8.2 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2687W v4 — making the Ryzen 9 5900X the 158.4% better value option.
| Feature | Ryzen 9 5900X | Xeon E5-2687W v4 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $549-74% | $2141 |
| Performance per Dollar | 71.0+766% | 8.2 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2016 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












